A Response Paper on The World Englishes Paradigm and its Implications for

International Students’ Acquisition of Standard American English for University-

Level Studies in the United States

Karen Applequist Clement’s “The World Englishes Paradigm and its Implications
for International Students’ Acquisition of Standard American English for University-Level
Studies in the United States (Minnesota State University-Mankato: Cornerstone: A
Collection of Scholarly and Creative Works for Minnesota State University, Mankato,
2011) is a comprehensive paper which specifically intends to find answers that will
clarify the ways we can do to help international students have greater chances of
succeeding in the American university system. This paper responds to the notion
citizens of English as an international language have regarding the world Englishes—
“that changes need to be made in terms of how we view the English language in
general, how we regard other varieties of English, how we construct English proficiency
tests, and lastly, how we should teach the English language”. All of these were made
clear by Clement as she provided a rich discussion of the topic concentrating on related
literature which gives background information on the global phenomenon of English,
examines non-standard grammatical features of world Englishes, summarizes the
results of studies on bias in English proficiency tests, and providing detailed
suggestions for best teaching practices enlightened by a new understanding of English.
With this, the paper wishes to promote changes in our attitude and understanding of the
world Englishes as these are deemed necessary to effectively respond to the effect of
globalization on the reality of English.
One of my reactions to this paper was the similarity I saw between the ideas
presented in Clement’s paper to that of our discussion about how we should view and
teach the English language. The study suggested that globalization and the continued
transmission of the language from one place to another has resulted to the continued
expansion of English, hence the myriad varieties of English in use today. As English
language has many varieties termed as “World Englishes”, and every place or group of
people has their own conventions in using the language, I believe that we should always
have an open-mind in terms of how we regard the language. Likewise, as English has
become the language of business, politics and academic arena around the globe,
teaching “standard English” to our students would only be detrimental than beneficial for
them. I agree to the points suggested by Clement that the mere existence of standard
language would only marginalize those who use non-standard varieties of the language.
All these ideas explained Dr. Alda’s proposition that there is no such thing as “single
standard” as other forms of which are also considered standard varieties such as
Philippine English, Singaporean English, and the like. However, despite the diverse
varieties of English, I agree that we should acknowledge and focus more on the
similarities of which for cross-cultural communication to occur.
As other varieties of the language are likewise considered standard, I found the
author’s discussion and proposition about English language teaching and testing useful
in explaining the shift that has to be made to make both processes fair. These likewise
made me realize that in English language teaching and testing we must make sure to
eliminate bias that may exist among language learners and provide equal privileges to
them, without marginalizing others.
In conclusion, I would strongly recommend Clement’s paper to the teachers,
students, and speakers of the English language for them to be enlightened of how they
should regard English language as a medium of instruction and communication.